Categories

Meta

xml

Ime point included in this study was 3 months, several earlier studies

Published August 15, 2017 by MEK Inhibitor- sgkinhibitor

Ime point included in this study was 3 months, several earlier studies demonstrated construct shrinkage or deformation by this time [2,4,9,22]. ML 240 Rather than using type I collagen native to inelastic, weightbearing tendons, it may seem more intuitive to use type II collagen as the basis for our construct bulk. However, the use of type II collagen in our injection get ��-Sitosterol ��-D-glucoside molding system is problematic, as its solubility is insufficient to yield the high-density (i.e., 15?0 mg/ ml) hydrogels needed to retain dimensional stability after molding. Indeed, studies using type II collagen hydrogels as a scaffold for chondrocytes report concentrations in the range of 1? mg/ml [24,25], which is inadequate for our purposes. Furthermore, a large number of studies report excellent results using type I collagen as a scaffold material for cartilage tissue engineering. Such studies report that chondrocytes seeded within these materials produce tissues that contain predominantly type II collagen [26]. As such, cellular constructs in the current study demonstrated the deposition of elastic neocartilage, as evidenced by characteristic Safranin O and Verhoeff staining. While many studies offer evidence of neocartilage production by chondrocytes in lacunae [2,4,5,6,8,9,11,12,13,22,27], few demonstrate the presence of elastin within specimens or utilized chondrocytes of auricular origin [2,8,12,13,22]. This distinction is important, as few chondrocytes (only those in the external ear, nasal septum, epiglottis, and corniculate and 1662274 cuneiform cartilages) specifically elaborate elastic cartilage. Furthermore, given differences in location, development, and local signaling milieu, it cannot be assumed that elastin-producing chondrocytes of non-auricular origin generate elastic cartilage identical to that found in the external ear. It is for these reasons that we believe auricular chondrocytes represent the optimal cell source for future tissueengineered auricular reconstructions. The native ear is frequently loaded and can experience a range of loading modes, including tension, compression, and bending. As a result, studies have evaluated the tensile [28], compressive [16,29,30,31], and bending [32] properties of tissue-engineered ear cartilage. The success of our approach to ear cartilage tissue engineering is highlighted by the mechanical properties of the tissue produced. By 3 months, the equilibrium modulus (a measure of tissue stiffness) and the hydraulic 1516647 permeability (a measure of the ease with which fluid can flow through the tissue) were similar to those of bovine auricular cartilage as well as human nasal septal cartilage [33]. The analogous data for human auricular cartilage are not readily available in the literature. Furthermore, relatively few studies have similarly evaluated the mechanical performance of tissue-engineered ear cartilage. In addition, we chose to evaluate the compressive properties of cartilage using confined compressiontesting, as this is the most reliable method to obtain the poroelastic material properties of cartilage. Only one other study to date [16] has demonstrated the formation of ear cartilage that is stable in a long-term animal model with material properties comparable to native ear cartilage. This previous study used a similar injection molding technique with alginate as the scaffold material and required up to 6 months following implantation in sheep to form fully mechanically competent implants [20]. In contrast, the current stud.Ime point included in this study was 3 months, several earlier studies demonstrated construct shrinkage or deformation by this time [2,4,9,22]. Rather than using type I collagen native to inelastic, weightbearing tendons, it may seem more intuitive to use type II collagen as the basis for our construct bulk. However, the use of type II collagen in our injection molding system is problematic, as its solubility is insufficient to yield the high-density (i.e., 15?0 mg/ ml) hydrogels needed to retain dimensional stability after molding. Indeed, studies using type II collagen hydrogels as a scaffold for chondrocytes report concentrations in the range of 1? mg/ml [24,25], which is inadequate for our purposes. Furthermore, a large number of studies report excellent results using type I collagen as a scaffold material for cartilage tissue engineering. Such studies report that chondrocytes seeded within these materials produce tissues that contain predominantly type II collagen [26]. As such, cellular constructs in the current study demonstrated the deposition of elastic neocartilage, as evidenced by characteristic Safranin O and Verhoeff staining. While many studies offer evidence of neocartilage production by chondrocytes in lacunae [2,4,5,6,8,9,11,12,13,22,27], few demonstrate the presence of elastin within specimens or utilized chondrocytes of auricular origin [2,8,12,13,22]. This distinction is important, as few chondrocytes (only those in the external ear, nasal septum, epiglottis, and corniculate and 1662274 cuneiform cartilages) specifically elaborate elastic cartilage. Furthermore, given differences in location, development, and local signaling milieu, it cannot be assumed that elastin-producing chondrocytes of non-auricular origin generate elastic cartilage identical to that found in the external ear. It is for these reasons that we believe auricular chondrocytes represent the optimal cell source for future tissueengineered auricular reconstructions. The native ear is frequently loaded and can experience a range of loading modes, including tension, compression, and bending. As a result, studies have evaluated the tensile [28], compressive [16,29,30,31], and bending [32] properties of tissue-engineered ear cartilage. The success of our approach to ear cartilage tissue engineering is highlighted by the mechanical properties of the tissue produced. By 3 months, the equilibrium modulus (a measure of tissue stiffness) and the hydraulic 1516647 permeability (a measure of the ease with which fluid can flow through the tissue) were similar to those of bovine auricular cartilage as well as human nasal septal cartilage [33]. The analogous data for human auricular cartilage are not readily available in the literature. Furthermore, relatively few studies have similarly evaluated the mechanical performance of tissue-engineered ear cartilage. In addition, we chose to evaluate the compressive properties of cartilage using confined compressiontesting, as this is the most reliable method to obtain the poroelastic material properties of cartilage. Only one other study to date [16] has demonstrated the formation of ear cartilage that is stable in a long-term animal model with material properties comparable to native ear cartilage. This previous study used a similar injection molding technique with alginate as the scaffold material and required up to 6 months following implantation in sheep to form fully mechanically competent implants [20]. In contrast, the current stud.